I am a Senior Political Contributor at Forbes and the official 'token lefty,' as the title of the page suggests. However, writing from the 'left of center' should not be confused with writing for the left as I often annoy progressives just as much as I upset conservative thinkers. In addition to the pages of Forbes.com, you can find me every Saturday morning on your TV arguing with my more conservative colleagues on "Forbes on Fox" on the Fox News Network and at various other times during the week serving as a liberal talking head on other Fox News and Fox Business Network shows. I also serve as a Democratic strategist with Mercury Public Affairs.

Guns: What Do We Do Now?

My mom would be SO proud to see President Obama holding her granddaughter. But not as proud as I am of her. http://pic.twitter.com/YDU88x3O Cristina Hassinger@Chass63 17 hours ago

Inevitably, a tragedy such as what we have experienced in Newtown, Connecticut brings the discussion about guns and violence in our society to the front of the American dialogue where it often lingers for a short time before receding to the background of the national discussion.

Will our response to this latest horror be any different?

While many believe that the chord touched by this unspeakable event will reach equally into the hearts of both the most ardent supporter of the right to bear arms and those who oppose guns—thereby prompting all sides to come to an understanding that something has to change—will this really prove to be the moment or will this tragedy just fade away as the many that have come before it have been allowed to go without response—if a response is even possible?

Certainly, there appears to be a special pain that comes with the stark realization that these 20 small children remind us all of our own kids, grandchildren, sisters and brothers. Those lost at Sandy Hook Elementary School looked and behaved just like our own children look and behave. They were in a place they were supposed to be—having been sent there by parents who did just as we have all done so many times when we buttoned up our kids’ winter coats and sent them off to school for the day. Because of this, we feel like we “know” these people better than those involved in similar tragedies in our past and because we feel that we can relate to those so grievously affected, we instinctively know that if ever there was an instance of “There, but for the grace of God, go I.”, this is surely it.

Still, if we are to hope for something to happen that might bear some positive impact on preventing these now all too frequent attacks, it has to begin with the two sides of this discussion moving towards a better understanding of what the other believes—just as it must involve a recognition that this is not just about the guns.

People who would very much like to see combat style weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines disappear from the landscape—people like me—must begin by accepting and internalizing the simple fact that those who support wide access to guns, including semi-automatic weapons, are feeling the very same grief today that is being experienced by anti-gun advocates.

Supporting gun ownership does not make one a cold and unfeeling human being who puts their interest in weapons above their interest in humanity.

Indeed, it is often quite the opposite. Avid defenders of the Second Amendment right to bear arms believe that it is precisely because of their desire to protect their own children that they take a strong, pro-gun position. It is, after all, difficult to argue with the suggestion that the evil and the confused will almost always find a way to get their hands on their weapon of choice and that the only corresponding choice one might have in the effort to defend against this reality is to fight “fire with fire.” As these folks are quick to point out, had more of the adults working at the Sandy Hook Elementary School been armed, just maybe this would have had a better ending.

Maybe. But we must also recognize that had the magazine clip been limited to fewer bullets, the odds of an adult being able to take this murderer to the ground before he could take more lives would also have been greatly increased.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Maybe the 5 extra steps that this person would have had to do to find the weapons he used would have alerted someone of an impending disaster, instead all he had to do was go to his mother’s closet, mentally ill people and READILY available weapons = a recipe for problems. Making the weapons even remotely more challenging to get; i.e. you have to make the large clips; might give another person the heads up that is needed to get the person moving in a different direction.

If studies like these are any indication, this is a very complex issue and one that is deserving of a protracted and calm analysis. While the 1994 assault weapons ban’s effects were mixed, there is certainly no evidence to suggest that it made us less safe. If anything, the loopholes included regarding existing weapons and magazines were responsible for its lukewarm efficacy. If you can find any clear and reasonable analysis that Assault weapon bans decisively make us “less safe,” please do yourself a favor and cite the studies used in obtaining this information. Otherwise, the rational among us will continue to talk about this in a calm way and look at actual statistics before jumping to self-serving conclusions.

I think we need another cabinet post with Rick being the first appointee … Secretary of Civil Discourse. I honestly don’t know how you remain so even in your responses Rick … clap clap clap. You even manage to not get into the shouting matches on Fox.

2. Write exceptions into the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) so that parents of mentally ill children can get access to their medical records.

3. End the Institutes for Mental Disease (IMD) exclusion in Medicaid law. This causes states to lock the front door of (mental) hospitals and open the back door.

4. Create a federal definition of serious mental illness, and require that the vast majority of mental health funding go to it. Only 5 to 9% of Americans have a serious mental illness, but most of the money goes to the 40% of Americans who have a mental “health” issue.

A very good start- but I could have done without the snarky last line but I guess you just can’t help yourself. I do think that all of these are things that are well worth exploring -along with some limitations on the guns.

I love the mental illness track on this argument. To me if you are so paranoid you think you need to have a boat load of guns to protect yourself, you need professional help and really I do not want you owning a gun.

Also I can’t imagine dictating to teachers that they should be carrying around weapons to kill someone, not everyone can be so blase about taking a human life.

I really think the NRA needs to stand up here, if they don’t want a knee jerk reaction. Be the first to the table. Acknowledge the issues and start working on a solution. I personally feel the tipping point is real soon and laws will be put in place that will be knee jerk and may not even address the issues. If gun owners don’t want a 9/11 reaction to this they need to drop the “don’t look here” argument and get in on the solution.

Well if we just made murder illegal, or legislated the places that were murder free zones, then maybe we wouldn’t have anymore of it. Or perhaps just limited the days you could murder somebody or the amount of murders you could commit if you were going on a rampage, then maybe mass murders would stop.

Oh did you hear about that guy who stabbed 22 children in China? I’m glad he didn’t have a gun.